JOINT COMMITTEE ON THE ENVIRONMENT, HERITAGE AND LOCAL GOVERNMENT díospóireacht -
Tuesday, 13 Nov 2007

Electoral Register: Discussion with Department of the Environment, Heritage and Local Government.

Chairman

The purpose of this part of the meeting is to discuss the electoral register. I welcome officials from the Department of the Environment, Heritage and Local Government. We are joined by Ms Geraldine Tallon, Secretary General, Mr. Maurice Coughlan, principal officer in the franchise section, and Mr. Barry Ryan, assistant principal officer in the same section. We will hear a brief presentation by the officials, followed by a question and answer session with members and further discussion of other aspects of the administration of elections.

Before the presentation commences, I draw attention to the fact that while members of the committee have absolute privilege, the same does not apply to witnesses appearing before the committee. Members are reminded of the long-standing parliamentary practice to the effect that they should not comment on, criticise or make charges against a person outside the Houses of the Oireachtas or an official, by name or in such a way as to make him or her identifiable.

Ms Geraldine Tallon

I thank the Chairman for inviting us to the meeting. My colleagues and I look forward to working with the joint committee in the coming months and years and welcome this opportunity to meet members to discuss the electoral register. The meeting takes forward the work the committee has done on the register in recent years. The Department is pleased to assist this process in accordance with our mandate.

For the information of the joint committee and at its request, we prepared a note on a number of specific issues related to the electoral register and otherwise. I understand this document has been circulated to members who will be aware that local authorities, as registration authorities, are responsible for the compilation and publication of the electoral register. It is their duty to ensure, as far as possible and with the co-operation of the public, the accuracy and comprehensiveness of the register in their respective areas. The role of the Department, under the Minister, is in respect of the policy and legislative framework governing elections generally, including the register. We also work to support and assist local authorities in their registration work through, for example, developing best practice guidance for authorities and overseeing annual national awareness campaigns.

The joint committee will be aware that in 2006 the then Minister initiated a package of specific additional measures to help local authorities in their work in compiling the electoral register. These measures included the following: the use of census enumerators or other temporary personnel to support local authorities in preparing the register for 2007 and 2008; additional ring-fenced financial resources for local authorities amounting to approximately €6 million; an early start being made to the local authority register campaign for 2007 and 2008; updated guidance for local authorities on the register generally and concerning the procedures to be followed in the register campaign; new arrangements to delete the names of deceased persons from the register by availing of the death event publication service developed by Reach; an intensive national awareness campaign costing approximately €1 million; and better on-line facilities to help people check the register through the www.checktheregister.ie website. The Department has worked with a group of local authority managers and senior officials to put in place this programme for improving the register.

The Minister's predecessor raised with the joint committee on a number of occasions issues surrounding the electoral register and the campaign. The campaign procedures provided that each household would be visited and given forms and information at least twice if necessary. In the event that that process did not satisfactorily register the household, written notification was then given, cautioning of the danger of being omitted from the register. As a result the campaign to compile the 2007-08 register, now in force, was the most extensive ever. Around 1,500 field workers were involved in making over 1.25 million household visits in a nationwide door-to-door campaign.

In terms of the outcome of that work, some 555,000 names were removed from the previous register and 523,000 names were added. Overall the register currently in force contains over 32,000 fewer names than the previous year. As regards those eligible to vote in Dáil elections, the register contains some 62,000 fewer names. On the other hand, significant numbers were added to the register between the draft and final stages and there were, of course, further opportunities for people to be included on the register by way of the supplement to the register before polling day in the recent general election.

On the basis of the work undertaken, it is reasonable to conclude that local authorities achieved a significant improvement in the accuracy and comprehensiveness of the register compared with previous years. People may have differing views on the register but nevertheless, the improvements which were made in advance of this year's general election were quite significant and this was acknowledged by the Taoiseach in the House last week.

That is not to say that all issues relating to the electoral register have been fully addressed or that unevenness in the production of the register as between local authorities or even within local authority areas has been eliminated. For a variety of reasons that include, for example, the logistics of and public responsiveness to the registration process, that is unlikely to be the case. It is clear that while good work has been done and good results have been secured, the register is an area that needs continuing policy attention and action.

For the 2008-09 register, local authorities have been advised that the approach should be to maintain and build on the progress to date through necessary field work and by making maximum use of information gathered in the course of the 2007-08 register campaign, which I have outlined, and subsequently information which could be provided by returning officers concerning their experiences with the register at the general election, information provided by members of the public and others at and after the election, and actions and initiatives by authorities which proved successful at local level in the course of the 2007-08 register campaign.

Local authorities were required to publish the draft register for 2008-09 by 1 November. It can be checked in a number of ways: in council offices, public libraries, post offices, Garda stations, on-line on each local authority website, and through the central site at www.checktheregister.ie.

In support of the registration process the Minister has launched a national awareness campaign, which encourages people to check the draft register to ensure that their details are present and correct. The campaign started on 1 November and will run until 25 November coinciding with the period when people can check the register and notify their city or county council of any errors or omissions so they can be rectified. That is the point at which the individual citizen has a role and responsibility in ensuring that he or she can exercise his or her vote on the next polling day.

Looking to the future, the agreed programme for Government commits to the establishment of an independent electoral commission, which will take responsibility for electoral administration and oversight, complement modern and efficient electoral practices, revise constituency boundaries, take over the functions of the Standards in Public Office Commission on election spending, and examine the issue of financing the political system. Of particular relevance to today's proceedings, the commission will also take charge of compiling a new national rolling electoral register. The Department is initiating work on developing proposals towards implementation of this key electoral reform measure.

Voter registration is an important and complex issue. There is widespread acceptance of the need for a rigorous approach to compiling the register. At the same time, we must avoid disenfranchising voters or discouraging the fullest possible voter participation. Political input is crucial to consideration of these issues and identification of where the balance is to lie between these two perspectives. I look forward, therefore, to the committee's discussion and the outcome of its work.

Chairman

I thank Ms Tallon. Before I call Deputy Hogan, I want to make some observations on Ms Tallon's contribution. She stated local authorities were responsible for the compilation of the electoral register. This means that there is no national body in existence dealing with the register, despite an election being a national event. I have a problem with this, as I am sure other committee members have, given that there are major inconsistencies between local authorities.

Ms Tallon stated: "The campaign procedures provided that each household would be visited and given forms and information at least twice if necessary". While this was the theory, it did not happen in thousands of households, which is one of the reasons for this meeting. Progress was made and much work was done on the register for the last election but the process is ad hoc from beginning to end and different local authorities give it different levels of priority. It is not possible under the current system to have an accurate national register because no national body is in charge.

Ms Tallon referred to the electoral commission and other issues of electoral administration on which we may touch during the meeting.

Deputy Phil Hogan

I welcome the Secretary General and her officials from the franchise section to this important meeting. I concur with the Chairman's point that it is and will continue to be a great challenge to get the electoral register right. It is a requirement to consider best practice in this regard.

As the Chairman noted, the inconsistencies between local authorities present one of the biggest problems. The key question is how we can bring consistency to this area. Perhaps the electoral commission proposed by the Minister will allow for a national body which will be able to bring consistency to it. Given that 62,000 fewer names are on the register, this clearly indicates that there was a major problem and that the previous register was seriously deficient. This proves the point that we have much work to do.

With regard to deleting names from the register, what happens when people are inadvertently not at home? The major issue for politicians is to find people at home, as they are very busy and often work away from home. If a person receives a letter stating the enumerator or a council official called and will call again in a week or two, and if he or she is not at home on the next occasion, he or she could be knocked off the register. Personal responsibility does not always come into play, which is the challenging aspect of this matter.

The inadvertent deletion of a person's or persons' names following the publication of the electoral register is not dealt with under the current regulations. I know of voters from an entire street whose names were inadvertently deleted from the register. One would almost have to go to the courts to have them restored to the register. Provision should be made in the system, whereby if the name of a person is deemed to have been inadvertently removed from the register, a facility would be available to return his or her name to the register following its publication, as the removal is not the fault of the individual concerned.

The only time politicians become involved in this issue is when they knock on doors during an election campaign. We rely on the officials of the local authority or those who work on the census to do this job properly. It is only when politicians are out canvassing on the doorsteps during a three or four week campaign that we discover the problems encountered. We have no remedy at that stage when a genuine problem is found. How can we find a mechanism to resolve such a genuine problem that has been validated?

One of the Sunday newspapers, I believe The Sunday Tribune, mentioned some very high turnout figures. I presume those figures are based on discounting people who are ineligible to vote, for example, foreign nationals, who are on the register. Turnout figures of 93% and 94% in the last general election seem very high. I would like to know how the machinery of the political system was able to achieve such a turnout.

Chairman

We will take questions from a few Deputies before the witnesses reply, starting with Deputy McCormack followed by Deputy Ciarán Lynch, Senator Hannigan, Deputy Christy O'Sullivan, Deputy Bannon and Deputy Tuffy.

Deputy Pádraic McCormack

I also welcome the officials. I have raised the following question at local authority level and at this level before. Not all local authorities meet the requirement to publish the electoral register by 1 November. The window of opportunity to make corrections to the draft register is only three weeks. The time from 1 November to the lead-up to Christmas is the worst possible time of year for correcting the register. Why is the draft register not published early in the year with a longer window of opportunity given to allow for corrections? I know that people not on the final register can be added to the supplementary register. However, people will not go through the difficult process of going to a Garda station and have a garda sign the application. People simply will not do so if they are not on the register. If a longer period of time to review the draft register were allowed, it would be quite easy for people to ensure they were included on the register.

The final paragraph of the report states that political input is crucial. November is the worst time for political input. If the draft registers were made available to political parties between January and March, when meetings take place and there is considerable political activity, people could have time to review the draft register to verify its accuracy. I do not know why the time between 1 and 25 November is the only period in which the draft register can be corrected. Sometimes when the draft register is not published or distributed to local authority members or Oireachtas Members until 10 or 11 November, we only have two weeks to review it, which is a ridiculous length of time for political input to assist in correcting the register. I would like this issue addressed rather than simply saying that it was what we always did in order for the register to be published on 1 February, or whatever the deadline date is, and time is needed to compile it. As very few elections take place at the start of February, why not publish the register on 1 May and catch all elections for that year by allowing a longer period to review the draft register?

Deputy Ciarán Lynch

I thank the Secretary General for appearing before the committee and providing the report. The article in last Sunday's edition of The Sunday Tribune worryingly showed a level of inaccuracy that undermines what I understand to be the three principles of the register system, namely, completion, accuracy and security. Given The Sunday Tribune report it would seem that completion is in difficulty, accuracy is way off the mark and security is also being undermined regarding figures. It was most notable that in 2007, which is an election year, we had 3,066,517 registered voters. However, based on the estimated real figure for the electorate, it should have been 2,918,583. Based on those figures we have an over-estimation of 105%. Therefore, there are 5% more voters in the country than there are people living in it. I note from the report that 555,000 names were removed and 523,000 names were added. When broken down that means 32,000 names came off the register. Considering the figures I gave earlier where there is an over-estimation of 150,000 people, even removing 32,000 people from that number is a significant overflow and indicates there are still major problems. What is the estimated figure compiled by the draft register? Is it more in line with the estimated real figure or is it off kilter from where we are at present?

What we seem to have is either a systems problem or a compilation problem. The overall system has been looked at a number of times. The public should not be confused by this, but the idea of using census enumerators is not an attempt to tie the census to the register of electors, far from it, it is just using some of the expertise that is used by those staff. Research has shown that visiting houses and using enumerators is flawed and is not the most proactive and positive way of dealing with the issue. As Deputy Hogan mentioned earlier, politicians knocking at doors will testify quite accurately as to how inaccurate an approach that can be, particularly in housing estates which have a high transient population.

Will there be a re-examination of the methodology used? In Northern Ireland where this problem has been looked at, the matter has been rectified. International figures suggest the accuracy figure should be approximately 80%. The Secretary General knows what I am talking about. If the register is at approximately 80% that means it is accurate. When there were serious voter difficulties in Northern Ireland the register was brought to within 80%. This was done by moving from a household system to an individual system, which was tied to people's dates of birth, their signature and a PPS system. I ask the Secretary General and her Department if such an approach will be examined here?

Senator Dominic Hannigan

I welcome the guests to the committee. I reiterate what Deputies Hogan and Lynch have said. There are issues about how we go about collecting the information. In my neck of the woods, one of the main problems faced by enumerators is finding people at home. People do not work traditional hours any more and, as a result, it is difficult to find them at home to get the information from them. I draw attention to the fact that the process for carrying out the exercise seems to be different from council to council. Some councils, without wishing to name names, appear to spend much time sending out repeat letters on top of repeat letters to people whom they had temporarily taken off the register. I am not sure if that was a proper use of resources. Other councils seem to adopt different tactics and yet achieve the same end result. Would the Department consider publishing standardised guidelines on how councils should undertake this exercise? At present, there appears to be too much flexibility in the system and councils could do with more firm advice on the matter.

Deputy Christy O’Sullivan

I welcome the Secretary General and her report. If we all start from the same point and realise there is a problem we might get somewhere. We are dealing with many local authorities, all of which give this issue a different priority. Some councils give it more time and take the matter more seriously. We will have a problem if we leave it to local authorities. If somebody dies the death is registered. There should not be a problem with those people's names appearing on the register after a certain amount of time. However, I am talking about people who are deceased for two or three years and, in some cases, up to ten years, whose names still appear on the register. That is ridiculous and should not happen. It is not appropriate for families to receive letters from politicians and organisations about family members who have died.

With regard to ensuring people's names are on the electoral register, it is easy enough to keep track of people through PPS numbers or other documents, as there are few people who are undocumented. We may need an organisation with overall responsibility to ensure an effort is made to get people's names on the register and that those who are entitled to vote can do so, rather than leave the matter completely to local authorities. I am interested in hearing whether the Secretary General has proposals to make in that regard.

Deputy James Bannon

I warmly welcome the new Secretary General to her first meeting in that position and wish her well in her new role.

The bedrock of any parliamentary democracy is its voter registration system. It is important, therefore, that the system in use is concise and clear, which is our aim. We have all experienced difficulties with regard to the register of electors and have come across numerous and significant inaccuracies in it. I am aware of cases where people whose names had been on the register for 50 or more years found that they had been removed from it in their 80s. Each local authority should provide a paper trail covering the removal of the name of an elector from the register. We should request that this be done. It is dreadful to have to tell elderly people that their names are not on the register. Such persons feel they have been removed from their role in society, yet they are the ones who turn out to vote. It is a great annoyance to them to find that their names have been removed from the register late in their lives. This problem has affected a number of people in my area.

We should consider establishing an independent electoral commission to oversee all aspects of the electoral system. I would like to hear the Secretary General's views on this suggestion and updating the register. We should consider using PPS numbers to ensure people's names are placed on it. PPS numbers are assigned at birth and the holders of these numbers should be automatically registered at 18 years of age. There is a need for joined-up thinking in this regard between the Department of Social and Family Affairs and the various Departments and bodies involved. People like the local postman also have a major role to play, as they know who lives where in townlands and the streets of an area. We should use the knowledge held within the postal service to upgrade and improve the register.

I understand the difficulties that have arisen as a result of the significant development that has taken place in the past ten years. It is difficult to gain access to most apartment blocks. There should be some onus on the management companies of apartment blocks to give details of their residents to the electoral commission when it is formed.

Deputy Joanna Tuffy

I thank the Secretary General for her presentation. How much of the €6 million which was ring-fenced last year was drawn down by local authorities? What was the take-up of extra census staff which were made available? My understanding is that there were 32,000 fewer people on the electoral register. Has Ms Tallon any idea how many of those were voters who should have been on the register?

Am I correct in saying that, during the period from 1 November to 25 November, people can get their names put onto the register by contacting the local authority but without obtaining a Garda signature or going to court? From 1 February one needs to go to court, or to do something similar of a legal nature, to be put on the register. That means that, after 25 November, it will become more difficult to get onto the register because one either must go to the relevant legal person or apply for the supplementary register, which requires that a garda sign one's form. Both methods are quite prohibitive and might deter people. The period from 1 November to 25 November should be extended until after Christmas so that people can get onto the register more easily. Would the Department consider that suggestion?

Has the Department any system to check if people have registered twice? Perhaps it could run a computer program through the whole country's register to double check whether people are registered twice. This issue was central to an article in The Sunday Tribune on inaccuracies in the register.

As has been mentioned, a sum of €6 million and extra census staff were provided last year but how much in extra resources will be provided to local authorities this year? Last year was the first time a person who did not respond could be deleted from the register. Many people did not respond as there are many new housing estates where residents receive a lot of literature through the door. Those who did not respond were deleted from the register. A safety net in the form of extra staff and resources was provided last year and that level of money should be matched or substantially matched, at least for this year.

Chairman

The Secretary General will probably have a note of the points raised, some of which were observations while others took the form of questions.

Ms Tallon

I thank the members of the committee for their comments, which provide valuable feedback from people who depend on the quality and accuracy of the register, as politicians inevitably do. Many of the comments have particular resonance in the context of the social change we have experienced in recent years. We have a commuting population and it is very difficult to find people at home during the day. People are far more mobile and many are newly settled in certain areas. All of these facets of social change and mobility have made the task of managing and maintaining the electoral register more difficult.

The procedures which were put in place last year were in response to considerable concern about the overall accuracy of the register with regard to the numbers who had left localities, were deceased, etc. The concern was that the register did not necessarily represent an accurate picture of the electorate.

Considerable efforts were made to ensure the procedures would be as fair as possible in attempting to contact the public. I appreciate that many were fearful in regard to the issue of deletions. The intention, therefore, was to visit all houses at least twice, to leave information in households and so on. If there was an inadvertent deletion, the supplement is always viewed as the ultimate fail-safe mechanism. There is a difficulty in that registration is voluntary. It is a permissive issue. It is not the same as the census. Completion of the census is obligatory, whereas one chooses whether to be registered. That may ultimately be a more difficult concept from the point of view of accuracy and comprehensiveness. Voting and exercise of the franchise are permissive rather than obligatory.

The various procedures, deadlines and dates may be difficult. Deputy McCormack referred to the difficulties associated with dates in November and February. They are set in law. We are implementing the law as it stands to the best extent possible.

We are interested in the experience in Northern Ireland. Deputy Ciarán Lynch referred to the experience there in regard to a register of approximately 85%. My understanding is that the Northern Ireland authorities ultimately felt they had gone too low in terms of the overall register and that there was a fear of disenfranchisement. They have now somewhat amended the system and are in the business of interrogating a range of databases to try to complement the normal survey approach.

In response to Senator Hannigan's question, we provided standardised guidance last year to assist the local authorities but, again, the social profile of areas can vary, which may be a problem when looking at areas at a more micro-level. In an area with a high level of commuting it is more difficult to find people at home. The death events system put in place under Reach will, I hope, be a good means of avoiding the practice of including the names of deceased persons in the register.

Deputy Lynch asked what was the estimated figure on the new draft register. It is 3.179 million.

Deputy Bannon mentioned the possibility of setting up an electoral commission. There is provision in the programme for Government for consideration of the establishment of an independent electoral commission, one of the functions of which would be to undertake the preparation of a national rolling register, something the Minister for the Environment, Heritage and Local Government will wish to take forward.

The question of using PPS numbers has been raised on a number of occasions. As there are approximately 5 million PPS numbers, it would not, necessarily, be the most accurate system of cross-checking. Furthermore, use of PPS numbers is restricted to the social welfare context.

My colleagues will assist on the detail of some of the issues raised by members, including those raised by Deputy Tuffy.

Mr. Maurice Coughlan

The best of us can get lost in some of the detail of franchise procedure. Before publication of the draft electoral register, the standard form, RFA 1, is available on-line for individual citizens. Between 1 and 25 November the process changes as the draft register is published. Those wishing to have their names included in the register must then fill in the RFA 1 form, which is still available on-line. This form must be sent to the local authority and is then sent to the county registrar. The practice among country registrars varies but attendance by individual citizens at a hearing is generally required only in cases of doubt. Form RFA 1 is available at www.checktheregister.ie. Completing the form does not require attendance at a Garda station.

There are difficulties for citizens, politicians and electoral administrations, given the time-bound and seasonal nature of the electoral registration process. It is well known that this creates difficulties. The process which now takes place between 1 and 25 November used to straddle the Christmas period, which was even more problematic. If it were done earlier in the year, it would stray into the summer holiday period. The move, within the framework of an electoral commission, towards a rolling registration process where one would not have these time-bound constraints should eliminate many of the problems encountered. A continuously available mechanism for citizens to have their names added to or removed from the electoral register should eliminate much of the element of seasonality.

Deputy Hogan and Senator Hannigan, among others, mentioned difficulties, given the current social climate, in gaining access to people in their homes. This raises the issue of the balance which must be struck between the obligation on the local authority or the electoral commission to register the citizen and the obligation on the citizen himself or herself. It is difficult to say where one should strike the balance. We must reflect carefully on that issue. It may be a microcosm of the broader question of accuracy versus comprehensiveness of the electoral register. On the one hand, the register must include the names of those entitled to be on it and no one else and, on the other, one must make sure, as far as possible, that no one loses his or her vote. In practical terms, choices must be made. The tendency has been to have an open system for getting people's names onto the register. That may be how some of the current issues arise. In the context of the further work of the joint committee, it will be good to ascertain where members, as practising politicians, believe the balance should lie between the at times competing considerations of accuracy and comprehensiveness.

Chairman

What is the allocation to local authorities for the project this year? Is a further special allocation available?

Mr. Barry Ryan

The €6 million available last year, to which Deputy Tuffy referred, was fully drawn down by the local authorities.

Chairman

Is €6 million available this year?

Ms Tallon

The local authorities would normally spend €4 million to €5 million each year on the electoral register and I expect they will spend a similar figure this year to build on the work they did last year.

Chairman

We are reverting to the old practice of ignoring the problem once the general election is out of the way.

Deputy Phil Hogan

If we are to make any improvement in the electoral register for future elections, the delegation will have to reflect on the suggestions members have made and return to the joint committee with a further report on the changes they believe would be practically possible. I have not heard anything to indicate the Department is willing to embrace change. The use of PPS numbers was mentioned and several other suggestions were made. If we want to be proactive about getting the electoral register right once and for all, the joint committee must charge the Department's franchise section with the responsibility of informing us at a further meeting of what is best practice. One hears from various Members that local authorities operate a mish mash of approaches. The franchise section should call upon the experience of the local authorities in an effort to determine best practice, for example, in gaining access to residents of apartment blocks and new estates with large populations.

Deputy Pádraic McCormack

There is also the problem of electronic gates.

Deputy Phil Hogan

Best practice approaches to these matters are available and it is the responsibility of the Department to ascertain what they are from the local authorities.

The practice by which county registrars send letters to those whose names have been removed from the electoral register, inadvertently or otherwise, requesting that they attend the revision court for a hearing on whether their names should be included in the register is intimidating. Members receive telephone calls from those who have received such letters asking whether it is necessary that they take an hour off work to attend court or meet the county registrar. While I am aware that citizens must assume a degree of personal responsibility, members of the public only get exercised about the franchise when an election is imminent and they wish to exercise their vote.

We should be able to get the electoral register right for €6 million, a substantial sum of money. It is not good enough, once the election is over, to wish the local authorities the best of luck and tell them they must do the best they can.

Deputy James Bannon

The Department should consider the possibility of utilising the information gleaned from the recent census to bring a degree of accuracy to the register of electors. My question on the need for a paper trail for those whose names have been removed from the register was not answered. Individuals are often unfairly blamed when their names are removed. A paper trail must be available to persons whose names are removed from the register after 30, 40 or 50 years for no apparent reason.

Deputy Christy O’Sullivan

The criteria used for removing a person's name from the electoral register must be examined. Many of those who work in other parts of the country and return home at weekends find they are registered to vote elsewhere when they seek to vote in elections. People should be able to vote in local and national elections in their home areas in which they have an interest.

Deputy Joanna Tuffy

I agree with Deputy Hogan that the practice of sending letters to those whose names have been removed from the electoral register is intimidating. It is too early in the process to resort to such measures. People might receive a letter from a county council telling them their name is about to be deleted from the register, but that may be the first time they noticed it. Where I live, people get so much literature through the door, so the first leaflet from the council could easily be missed and thrown away like any other leaflet. Subsequently, they get a letter telling them they will be deleted from the register. As Deputy Hogan said, they may have to attend a hearing to get back on the register, which would be extremely off-putting. Many people might not bother this year because there is no election coming up in the foreseeable future.

It is worrying that no extra resources are being provided to county councils this year. It is not possible for councils to build on previous years any more. It used to be every four years, but the new system basically means that one must respond or one will be deleted. Therefore, one is starting the electoral register from scratch each year. Until people get used to that new system we need to provide extra staffing — something similar to the additional staffing and resources provided last year. This is important because although there will probably be no election next year, there will definitely be one in 2009. If people are deleted from the register this year, they will not even get a letter telling them of the deletion process when the register is being drawn up next year. Therefore, people who are knocked off the register this year could be lost to the system when it comes to the local elections. The compilation of this year's register is important. It is a serious matter that we have reverted to the old type of funding, which was there for a totally different system whereby people were not deleted from the register if they did not respond to the county council. That is the system people had been used to for 30 years.

Deputy Ciarán Lynch

I thank the Secretary General and her staff for their response. Am I to understand that there are now 110,000 more people on the draft register than are currently on the official register? According the Secretary General's response, there are now 3.17 million people on the draft register as opposed to 3.066 million earlier this year, so we have seen an increase of 110,000. From what I can gather therefore, we have gone even further ahead of the census figures.

There are two separate issues regarding the overall governance of the system: how the information is collated nationally, and how the individual citizen relates to the register. It is proposed to establish a national electoral commission or alternatively that we would remain with the 34 local authorities that are putting the registers together. At the individual level, we take the register per household, which is what happened in Northern Ireland. The Secretary General is right in saying that there were some flaws in that system but they held on to it as they found the principle of an individual-based registering system was sound. They amended it afterwards because they were achieving accuracy but found there was a drop off, although they did not drop the core principle of individual registration under the PPS system. In fact, they hung on to it and their own recommendations are to continue with that method.

It is only fair that the delegation should leave here with some suggestions rather than just a critique. The suggestion would appear to be that if we stay with the 34 local authorities we must create some sort of standardisation across all 34 of them. We must also ensure that the funding local authorities receive under a franchise is ring-fenced. It is a core duty, not something that some local authorities do better than others. At this stage, we must seriously examine the individual registration system.

Chairman

I shall add fuel to the fire with a few extra comments. I agree with Deputy Hogan that PPS numbers were dismissed too quickly. I know the Secretary General said the figure was 5 million, including people who might not have the right to vote, but we know also that the figure includes children. Last year, when the Department was doing this, it asked the local authorities to carry out the extra work on the electoral register. Did it formally talk to An Post, which has a staff member calling to every house almost every day of the week? I cannot fathom how a local authority would ever have the ability to match An Post in carrying out this work. Those who read ESB meters could also be considered. There seems to be some hassle with regard to the issue of rate collectors. When this matter arose and extra people were being taken on, we were told this used to be a job for rate collectors years ago, although an industrial relations issue apparently got in the way

I will be up front about our concerns. I have zero confidence in the local authorities' ability to get this job right. Before I joined this committee, I was satisfied it was not a core local authority function. The local authorities are not interested in this business and allocate staff on an ad hoc basis when they come under pressure. Perhaps this is not their fault but of the Government at national level. However, the issue has never been taken sufficiently seriously and the current process has failed. I would like to begin from the basis that we must get it right. As I noted, the local authorities did not call to all the houses in the area, as the guidelines might have suggested, because they could not get the personnel to do so. I have a major difficulty in this regard.

With regard to the administration of elections, we are definitely moving towards an electoral commission. As I understand it, the current position is as follows. The Department of the Environment, Heritage and Local Government is responsible for policy matters. The local authorities are responsible for the electoral register and polling schemes. Each local authority must come up with a scheme at least every ten years. Ms Tallon might forward to us the information on when each local authority last drew up its polling scheme because many are out of date and some voters are up to 14 miles from a polling station. This information should be available in the Department's system and can be forwarded to us.

The Local Government Management Services Board has a role in maintaining the electoral register and providing information technology. The returning officers are the county sheriffs. I understand returning officers make returns on administration costs in their budgets to the Department of Finance, not the Department of the Environment, Heritage and Local Government. The Standards in Public Office Commission deals with candidates with regard to election expenditure and donations, while the Department of Finance issues reimbursements to candidates with regard to their election expenditure. Oireachtas Members must make other returns on Members' interests which are almost parallel to the returns made to the Standards in Public Office Commission.

With regard to local elections, the returning officers are different from those dealing with a general election, as they are council staff. In the Seanad elections the returning officers are Seanad staff.

Although I am sure I have missed some of them, I count approximately ten State organisations which have an electoral role from the operation of the electoral register to the declaration of the result and election finances. This does not make for a joined-up approach. Everybody has some responsibility for something but nobody has responsibility for anything. Unless one individual in some office or group is held responsible for this process from beginning to end, it will continue to be all over the place.

Reference was made to the Electoral Office for Northern Ireland. I suggest we make arrangements to travel to the North to visit that office to see how it operates. I have not visited it before. I will ask the clerk to ascertain what travel arrangements the committee should make to enable us to do this as soon as practicable because it could be helpful.

None of this applies to the position of Ms Tallon as the new Secretary General. From the day I entered public life ten years ago, I have had a bad opinion of how the electoral register operates and my opinion has worsened with each successive year. My honest opinion is that the current system is beyond redemption.

Ms Tallon

I thank the Chairman. It is always very good to start out on the basis of honesty. I know where I stand for my term as Secretary General on this basis.

Chairman

I am not criticising the Department of the Environment, Heritage and Local Government across the board. Each local authority is responsible and nobody has overall responsibility after that. The system was probably designed before most of those present were born. We have inherited a problem.

Ms Tallon

The reality is that we have inherited quite a complex organisational model that has evolved over many years and perhaps has had additions over many years, but perhaps has not been the subject of any fundamental root and branch review of the kind that is now contemplated in the programme for Government. Generally the comments made by committee members well illustrate a quotation, which our former Minister used when he met the committee last year. It was a quotation from the International Institute for Democracy and Electoral Assistance in its handbook on electoral system design which stated, "Voter registration is the most complex and controversial, and often the least successful part of electoral administration." That appears to be the international experience. Perhaps it does not line us up with international best practice.

I did not in any sense intend to suggest that we were ruling out PPS numbers out of hand. It simply did not prove possible last year in the work involved to align registration and the PPS system and would have required significant new legislation. There are distinctions in the sense that there are more than 5 million PPS numbers in comparison with the numbers on the register. The PPS system does not necessarily capture the residence or citizenship of people. Many people do not have PPS numbers, such as young adults who have not entered the workforce or older people who have been retired for some years.

I apologise if I misled Deputy Ciarán Lynch regarding the figures. I cited the figure for the local register. The register for Dáil electorate currently in force had 3.066 million people for 2007-08. The draft register for Dáil electorate is now 3.089 million. The local register is 3.179 million and the local electorate in the register currently in force was 3.147 million. Those are the figures.

Chairman

The register was published in February. The supplementary register was published a few days after the general election was called. Did all those on the supplementary register go into that? How many were on the supplementary register? Would that account for most of the additional 23,000 on the Dáil register or have new people been added in recent weeks?

Mr. Coughlan

From memory, approximately 36,000 people came onto the supplement in the course of the general election campaign.

Chairman

We are now saying that we have a reduction. The register was 3,066,000 plus the 36,000 who came on from the supplement.

Mr. Coughlan

To make that conclusion, it would be necessary to drill down into the detail of the supplement more than we have done. The Department has gross figures for the total numbers who came onto the supplement. Some of them might have changed address since the general election was called. We cannot be sure that they are all additional to last year's register.

Chairman

We will tease it out for a minute. Perhaps Mr. Coughlan could come back to us with some information on it. I do not want the officials to do any excessive work on the matter, as there would be a limit to its value. Some 3,066,000 were on the register on 15 February 2007 and 36,000 came onto the supplement. From my experience they were mostly new names. I looked at the supplement in my constituency during the election and most were not on the original register.

Mr. Coughlan

I would normally agree but there would be some changes of address.

Chairman

The majority. We have dropped back to a figure of 3.089 million, a fall of 12,000. It appears as if no new names have been included in the register. That is how the overall figure appears to me. It does not seem as if the procedure we have followed in the past month resulted in the inclusion of any new names; in fact, we have lost some, when the supplement is added to the register. Are those included in the supplement automatically added to the register? What is the formal procedure?

Mr. Coughlan

While by law a register is compiled by each local authority each year, the guidance to the local authorities is that information on the names of those who register by way of the supplementary register should be taken into account in compiling the next register. I cannot give a guarantee that the names of all 36,000 appear on the electoral register.

Chairman

I have heard that before. If a person went to the Garda station last April to have his or her form stamped to be included in the supplementary register and voted, there is no guarantee that his or her name has been included in the draft register issued recently. The law is not definitive on the issue. It appears to be a weakness that after all the trouble one might have gone to to have his or her name included in the supplementary register, his or her name might not be included in the new register.

Mr. Coughlan

It should happen; that was the guidance provided for the local authorities. From where we sit, I cannot give a guarantee that it has happened.

Chairman

Is it a legislative weakness that the local authorities are not obliged to ensure it will happen?

Mr. Coughlan

Yes, there is no specific provision in legislation. The legislation requires that-----

Chairman

The local authority start again.

Mr. Coughlan

-----a local authority prepare a register each year.

Chairman

That is a point we will take up.

Deputy James Bannon

A pilot exercise should be carried out in some local authority in respect of the supplementary register. What is the level of registration among new non-national workers? Those EU citizens will be entitled to vote in local and European elections in two years' time. How many of them make an effort to have their names included in the register? Do the local authorities have to pursue them?

Ms Tallon

I presume the figure the Deputy seeks is the difference between the Dáil electorate and the electorate for local elections which includes non-nationals. I do not want the committee to be of the view that there is an unwillingness on our part to engage with it on the issues being addressed or the details it wants to tease out. We are outlining the facts as we know them and the legislation for which we are responsible. Ultimately, we are conscious of the fact that policy is evolving and that there are significant provisions incorporated in the programme for Government which have to be advanced in the context of normal Government policy development. They will be spoken about in the appropriate place in the coming period.

Chairman

That concludes the business of the meeting, which was very informative. I thank the delegation for its attendance. It will understand that nothing exercises politicians more than anything to do with the voting system, about which we feel strongly. We are of the view that it was a very hot topic last April and May. As a new committee, it would be wrong to forget about it now that the election is over. That is the reason we wanted to come back to it at an early stage. We will produce a report on the issue as soon as practicable. We will also speak to the authorities in Northern Ireland and may speak with the Department of Social and Family Affairs on whether the system of PPS numbers can be modified. There are a couple of issues we may tease out as a committee which, presumably, will meet again this day fortnight.

The joint committee adjourned at 4 p.m. until Tuesday, 30 November 2007.